The Delhi High Court, led by Judge Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, has put a pause on a decision made by an arbitrator in a lease disagreement. The case involves the family of the late Dinesh Sehgal and Rajinder Pal Khanna. The court decided to pause the decision until further review, with certain conditions for the Sehgal family.
The argument is about extending and renewing leases for a property in South Extension Part-I Market, New Delhi. The Sehgal family, who rents from the Khanna family, wanted to keep their leases the same. However, the Khannas wanted the property back and asked for compensation.
The Arbitrator turned down the Sehgal family's requests for the first and fourth floors because they were too late. Requests for the second and third floors were not too late but were turned down for not meeting additional requirements according to Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
"The Arbitrator rejected the claims... because they were filed after the allowed time."
Represented by Mr. Akhil Sibal, the Sehgal family argued that the decision was unfair and went against basic fairness. They claimed they weren't given a chance to discuss important issues, and the arbitrator made a mistake in calculating the time limit.
"The petitioners were not given a chance to speak on the issues of time limits and Section 34 of the SRA."
Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, representing the Khannas, argued that the decision was fair and made sense. He opposed the pause, stating it would cause financial harm as the Sehgal family was paying less than the market rent.
"The challenged decision is neither unreasonable nor clearly wrong."
The court recognized the Sehgal family's long-term business at the property and possible serious harm if the decision wasn't paused. However, it required them to deposit 50% of the awarded amount as a condition for the pause.
"The effect of the challenged decision is paused until further review... subject to the following conditions."
The court has decided to pause the arbitrator's decision while reviewing the case further. The Sehgal family must deposit half of the awarded amount to ensure this pause. The case will be looked at again on February 23, 2026, as the legal proceedings continue.
